Digest of 8th Road transportation sub-group meeting...franchised bus companies to use electric buses...

Present:

AIR QUALITY OBJECTIVES (AQO) REVIEW WORKING GROUP

ROAD TRANSPORTATION SUB-GROUP

Digest of the 8th Meeting

held on 16 May 2017 (Tuesday) at 2:30pm

in Conference Room, 33/F, Revenue Tower,

5 Gloucester Road, Wanchai

Mrs. CHEUNG CHIU Hoi Yue, Deputy Director of Environmental

Alice, JP Protection (3) (Vice-chairperson),

Environmental Protection

Department

Mr. Paul LI

Mr. Aaron NG

Mr. Madison TANG

Mr. Stanley CHAING

Mr. Matthew WONG

Dr. Ringo LEE

Dr. HUNG Wing Tat

Ms. Suzanne Kit Yi CHEUNG

Mr. Dave HO Principal Environmental Protection

Officer (Mobile Source), Environmental

Protection Department

Mr. LI Yeuk Yue, Tony Principal Assistant Secretary for

Transport & Housing (Transport)2,

Transport and Housing Bureau

Ms. PANG Oi Ling, Irene Chief Assistant Secretary (Works) 3,

Development Bureau

Ms. Rachel KWAN Assistant Commissioner (Bus and

Railway), Transport Department

Mr. TSE Chun Tat Chief Engineer/ Land Works, Civil

Engineering and Development

Department

Mr. WONG Wai Yin, Patrick Senior Town Planner/Strategic Planning

1, Planning Department

Mr. FUNG Kin Yi Senior Engineer/Energy Efficiency A3,

Electrical and Mechanical Services

Department

1

Absent with Apologies:

Ms. Christine LOH Under Secretary for the Environment

(Chairperson), Environment Bureau

Mr. Roger LEE

Mr. LING Chi Keung

Mr. SO Sai Hung

Ir Dr. David HO

Mr. TUNG Ching Leung

Mr. Daniel NG

Ir FUNG Man Keung

Hon CHAN Choi Hi

Hon KWAN Sau Ling

Mr. Patrick FUNG

Mr. Evan AUYANG

In Attendance:

Ms. HO Wing Kam, Josephine Acting Senior Environmental Protection

Officer (Air Policy) 1, Environmental


Mr. IP Ho Yin, Nelson Acting Senior Environmental Protection

Officer (Mobile Source) 3,

Environmental Protection Department

Mr. CHEN Hao Ting, Ambrose Environmental Protection Officer

(Mobile Source) 31, Environmental


Mr. SHEK Wing Kei Environmental Protection Officer

(Mobile Source) 34, Environmental


Professor FUNG Chi Hung, Consultant’s representative, HKUST Jimmy

Mr. Karl AN Consultant’s representative, AECOM

Asia Company Limited

Chairperson’s Remarks 1. The Vice-chairperson welcomed members to the eighth meeting of the

Road Transportation Sub-group.

Agenda Item 1: Confirmation of the amended digest of the sixth meeting

2. The Secretariat said that the digest of the sixth meeting had been amended

according to members’ proposals. The Environmental Protection

Department (EPD) briefed members on the amendments. The amended

digest of the sixth meeting was confirmed.

2

Agenda Item 2: Confirmation of the amended digest of the seventh

meeting

3. The digest of the seventh meeting of the Sub-group held on 30 March 2017

was confirmed.

Agenda Item 3: Confirmation of revised assessment on the practicability to

implement the proposed measure D2

4. The Chairperson advised members that the Secretariat and relevant

departments had revised the assessment of Measure D2 based on members’ comments after the sixth and seventh meetings. The Chairperson invited

members to discuss and confirm the assessment. After detailed discussion

(see Annex 1), members confirmed the revised assessment on the

practicability to implement Measure D2.

Agenda Item 4: Discussion on the assessments on the practicability to

implement the proposed measures G2, G3 and measures H2, H3, H4, H7 &

H8

5. The Transport and Housing Bureau (THB) briefed members on the

assessments of “Measure G2 - Enhance enforcement against illegal

parking” and “Measure G3 - Review on-street metered parking fees”. After

detailed discussion, members confirmed the assessments of Measures G2

and G3. The Sub-group’s conclusions are summarised at Annex 1.

6. THB briefed members on the assessment of “Measure H4 - Address the

personal and operational needs of heavy vehicle drivers, such as provision

of parking space and arrangement of meal and rest breaks at the Kwai

Chung Container Terminals area, so as to reduce air pollution arising from

idling engines”. After detailed discussion, members confirmed the

assessment of Measure H4. The Sub-group’s conclusions are summarised

at Annex 1.

7. EPD briefed members on the assessments of “Measure H2 - Set out

objectives/policies to support the use of cleaner vehicle fuels”, “Measure

H3 - Extend the coverage areas of the existing low emission zones and its

restriction to other vehicle types”, “Measure H7 - Provide funding support

to innovative projects initiated by the public that can alleviate traffic

congestion and improve air quality” and “Measure H8 - Raise public

awareness on environmental protection, promote green living and

encourage the public to use public transport systems as well as low

emission transportation options”. After detailed discussion, members

confirmed the assessments. The Sub-group’s conclusions are summarised at

Annex 1.

3

Agenda Item 5: Discussion on key considerations for the implementation of

proposed measures G1, H1, H5 & H6

8. THB and EPD briefed members on the background information and policy

directions relating to “Measure G1 - Raise the first registration tax of highly

polluting vehicles as well as private cars and impose higher licence fees for

highly polluting vehicles to manage the growth of vehicles” to facilitate

members’ discussion and evaluation of the proposed measure. Some

members considered that the measures should not target at private cars and

suggested to amend the title of Measure G1 to “Raise the first registration

tax of highly polluting vehicles and impose higher licence fees for highly

polluting vehicles to manage the growth of vehicles”. Members discussed

in detail the key considerations of this measure. Members’ comments are summarised at Annex 2.

9. EPD and the Electrical and Mechanical Services Department briefed

members on the background information and policy directions relating to

“Measure H1 - Provide information on the energy efficiency, emission

performance and noise level of vehicles, etc. to facilitate the public to make

a more environmentally-friendly choice” to facilitate members’ discussion and evaluation of the proposed measure.

10. THB briefed members on the background information and policy directions

relating to “Measure H5–Set up priority lanes for public vehicles” to

facilitate members’ discussion and evaluation of the proposed measure. Some members suggested amending the title of the measure to “Set up a

continuous and effective priority road network for public vehicles”. The

Sub-group agreed to the amendment.

11. The Transport Department briefed members on the background information

and policy directions relating to “Measure H6–Review the policy on

replacement of franchised buses” to facilitate members’ discussion and evaluation of the proposed measure.

12. Members discussed in detail the key considerations for Measures H1, H5

and H6. Members’ comments are summarised at Annex 3.

13. The Administration said that the Secretariat and relevant departments would

conduct a feasibility analysis on the proposed measures under the above

items after the meeting according to the comments made by members.

Assessment results would be prepared and distributed to members by

e-mail for information and confirmation. Members could provide their

comments on the assessments to the Secretariat. [Post meeting note: the

Secretariat had conducted a feasibility study and prepared assessment

4

results for measures G1, H1, H5 and H6 after the 8th

meeting, and provided

to the Subgroup members for reference and confirmation through e-mail on

28 July 2017. Member’s comments are summarised in Annexes 2 and 3.]

Agenda Item 6: Any other business

14. Some members suggested amending the title of “Measure A1 - Review the

tunnel toll policy and level (e.g. the Government to buy back the tunnels, to

launch tunnel toll subsidy pilot scheme)” to “Review the tunnel toll policy

and level to alleviate traffic congestion, thereby reducing the emissions

caused by congestion at the tunnels” with the content of evaluation

remained unchanged. The Sub-group confirmed the amendment.

15. The Chairperson said that this was the last meeting of the Road

Transportation Sub-group and thanked members for their contributions

during the discussions. The Chairperson reminded members that the 3rd

meeting of the AQO Review Working Group would be held on 15 June

2017 and invited them to attend the meeting.

Agenda Item 7: Date of the next meeting

16. This was the last meeting of the Road Transportation Sub-group.

17. The meeting was adjourned at 4:50 p.m.

5

Annex 1

Members’ comments on the assessment results of measure D2, G and H

Measure Members’ Comments and Conclusion upon

Discussion

D2. Electric vehicles

pilot schemes -

switching the

existing vehicle

fleet of selected

routes to electric

vehicles

Members’ Comments Members suggested changing the conclusion from

“… for conducting trials with an aim to replace

the current franchised buses” to “…for conducting

trials with a hope to replace the current franchised

buses”.

Conclusion:

Practicability for implementation: Long Term

[Post-meeting note: the relevant departments had

further amendments on the conclusion of Measure D2.

The revision version is as follows. The Secretariat

had provided the revision to members for reference

and confirmation through e-mail.]

The Sub-group noted that the trial of 36 single-deck

electric buses fully funded by EPD is in progress to

assess the reliability of buses, batteries,

supercapacitors and charging facilities; maintenance

requirements; and economic feasibility, etc. for

ascertaining their suitability for use as franchised

buses in Hong Kong. If the trial results are

satisfactory, the Government will encourage

franchised bus companies to use electric buses on a

wider scale, taking into account the affordability of

franchised bus companies and passengers. The

Sub-group suggested the Government partner with bus

operators to help identify appropriate models which

might be potentially suitable for the local environment

for trial on a wider scale in the longer term. More

proactive and positive measures to support the

installation of ancillary facilities should also be

explored.

G2. Enhance

enforcement

Members’ Comments

Members hoped that the relevant policies

6


Discussion

against illegal

parking

implemented by the Government should be

targeted to solve the traffic congestion problem

caused by illegal parking in rush hours (e.g.

against black spots of illegal parking, such as

Causeway Bay, Tsim Sha Tsui and Central).

Members also indicated that the transport trade

still has reservations about increasing the fine for

illegal parking.

Conclusion:

Practicability for implementation: Short Term

[Post-meeting note: the relevant departments had

further amendments on the conclusion of Measure G2.

The revision version is as follows. The Secretariat

had provided the revision to members for reference

and confirmation through e-mail.]

The Police will continue to step up enforcement

against illegal parking as well as other traffic problems

at the district level, and often conduct territory-wide

enforcement programme to tackle illegal parking.

G3. Review on-street

metered parking

fees

Members’ Comments No comments.

Conclusion:

Practicability for implementation: Short Term

The Sub-group confirmed the assessment. Members

in general agreed that the charges for metered parking

spaces at present are very low, and there is room for

increasing the charges in order to reduce drivers

circling around streets waiting for parking spaces

which worsen traffic congestion at some of the roads.

However, members acknowledged that the proposed

measure would induce increase of pricing in some

private carparks.

H2. Set out Members’ Comments

objectives/policies No comments.

to support the use

of cleaner vehicle Conclusion:

Practicability for implementation: Others fuels

The Sub-group confirmed the assessment. The

7


Discussion

Government will continue with its multipronged

approach in reducing tailpipe emissions from motor

vehicles and continue monitoring relevant

international developments so as to adopt the most

stringent motor vehicle fuel standards and introduce

cleaner fuels when they become practicable for Hong

Kong.

H3. Extend the

coverage areas of

the existing low

emission zones

and their

restriction to other

vehicle types

Members’ Comments

No comments.

Conclusion:

Practicability for implementation: Others

The Sub-group confirmed the assessment. A number

of effective measures have been put in place to reduce

emissions from the entire vehicle fleet in the whole

territory. Such measures are more effective in

improving roadside air quality than extending the

coverage of the low emission zones or setting up

“ultra-low emission zones”. The Government will

continue the multipronged approach and consider the

latest technological developments in choosing the

most effective measures when formulating policies for

further improvement of roadside air quality.

H4. Address the

personal and

operational needs

of heavy vehicle

drivers, such as

provision of

parking space and

arrangement of

meal and rest

breaks at the Kwai

Chung Container

Terminals area, so

as to reduce air

pollution arising

from idling

engines

Members’ Comments

No comments.

Conclusion:

Practicability for implementation: Medium Term

The Sub-group confirmed the assessment. Members

acknowledged the work undertaken by the

Government on increasing commercial vehicle

parking spaces and recommended the Government to

step up the work in this area so as to provide more

commercial vehicle parking spaces for long term and

short term parking.

Other relevant views:

Members acknowledged the relevant work of THB.

Members hoped that the Government would provide

more parking spaces and at the same time the

enforcement departments should step up efforts to

8


Discussion

combat illegal parking. Members also hoped that the

Government could formulate policies to accord

priority to tackle the shortage of commercial vehicle

parking spaces. The Government responded that it

would convey the concerns to the relevant

departments.

H7. Provide funding to Members’ Comments

support District No comments.

Councils for

implementing air Conclusion:

Practicability for implementation: Others quality

The Sub-group confirmed the assessment. The improvement Government will need considerable resources to projects administer a public fund in order to ensure that public

money is used prudently. Public members who

would like to conduct innovative projects at district

level that can help improve air quality can apply for

funding under the Environment and Conservation

Fund. As such, there is no strong justification to set up

the proposed funding to subsidise air quality

improvement projects at district level.

H8. Raise public Members’ Comments:

awareness on No comments.

environmental

protection, Conclusion:

Practicability for implementation: Short Term promote green

This measure has been implemented and is still living and ongoing. The Government will continue its efforts in encourage the promoting walking and cycling as well as encouraging public to use the use of public transport systems.

public transport

systems as well as

low emission

transportation

options.

9

Annex 2

Members’ views on the implementation of

measure G1 and their main considerations

[Post-meeting note: the relevant departments had further amendment after the

meeting on the title of Measure G1. The revision version is as follows.]

Measure G1 –Raise the first registration tax and annual licence fee of

more polluting vehicles, as well as to manage the growth of vehicles in

particular private cars.

Key Considerations Members’ Comments

1. Cost effectiveness Some members opined that private cars was

not the main cause of roadside air pollution

and considered that the increase in the number

of private cars was depending on population

growth and where new housing was built.

Some members reflected that the existing

roadside air pollution problem was originated

from the fact that development of new roads

was unable to cope with the growth of private

cars, resulting in traffic congestion and

unnecessary emissions from commercial

vehicles, buses, etc.

Some members said that it was technically

impossible to impose different licence fees for

different emission levels.

Some members said that the Government

could consider encouraging the public to

purchase more environmentally-friendly

vehicle models through financial incentives on

the basis of the emission levels of vehicles, or

increasing the fees of high-emission vehicles

so as to reduce roadside emissions.

THB responded that the Government accepted

a series of recommendations of the Transport

Advisory Committee (TAC), including

increasing the first registration tax and annual

licence fees, in order to alleviate the traffic

congestion. The Government is taking forward

progressively the recommendations. For

2. Public and

transport trade’s reaction

3. Implementation

timeframe

10

Key Considerations

4. Impact on the

freight transport

sector

Members’ Comments

developed areas, it is practically difficult to

build new roads due to limited land resources.

The Planning Department responded that

public transport and railway transport service

would play a dominant role in “Hong Kong

2030+”, but it is still necessary to build roads

in developing new strategic growth areas

taking into consideration the consultation

outcome. Further studies shall be required

when necessary.

Post-meeting note: The Secretariat had prepared

the assessment on the practicability for

implementation of the proposed measure G1 after

the 8th

meeting, which was sent to the Subgroup

members by email for reference and confirmation

on 28 July 2017. Member’s comments and conclusion are as follow:

Members’ Comments:

No comments.

Conclusion

Practicability for implementation: Short term

The Sub-group confirmed the assessment. On

managing the growth of vehicles (in particular

private cars), the members noted that the

Government is taking forward progressively the

recommendations of the TAC in the “Report on

Study of Road Traffic Congestion in Hong Kong”,

including recommendations for containing the

growth of private car fleet through increasing the

FRT and annual licence fee for private cars and

raising the “fuel levy” for diesel private cars. The members acknowledged that the implementation of

both fiscal and non-fiscal measures to control

private car growth needs the consensus and

supports of the community and Legislative Council

as legislative amendments are required.

As regards the control over highly polluting

vehicles, the Government has been implementing a

wide range of measures targeting high emitting

vehicles which include phasing out pre-Euro IV

11


diesel commercial vehicles (DCV), limiting the

service life of newly registered DCVs and vehicle

emission control programmes to identify highly

emitting vehicles and require them to fix their

problems and undergo vehicle emission tests, etc.

Therefore, vehicle owners and the transport trades

will object to the proposal of further raising the

licence fees and FRT for high emitting vehicles.

Moreover, some members pointed out that it would

be difficult to set the criteria for determining

licence fees based on emission levels. Therefore,

the proposed measure to impose higher licence fee

on more polluting vehicles is not practicable.

Managing the growth of vehicles (in particular

private cars) is a short-term measure. However, the

proposed measure to impose higher licence fees

and FRT on more polluting vehicles is not

practicable. The Government will continue to

implement the current control measures targeting

high emitting vehicles.

12

Annex 3

Members’ views on the implementation of measures H1, H5 and H6 and their main considerations

Measure H1 – Provide information on the energy efficiency, emission

performance and noise level of vehicles, etc. to facilitate the public to make

a more environmentally-friendly choice.


1. Cost

effectiveness,

trades reaction,

demand and

practicability

Members said that the measurement of energy

efficiency performance of vehicles was conducted

under the control environment at the laboratory.

There were discrepancies between the measurement

at the laboratory and the actual performance of

vehicles in daily driving.

Members pointed out that although different

standards were used by vehicle manufacturers in

different areas for measuring fuel consumption, the

Government might still consider providing such

information for public reference.

Members said that third party, e.g. the Consumer

Council, could be engaged to conduct comparison

of energy efficiency of vehicles.

EPD responded that since there were discrepancies

between the energy efficiency data obtained from

testing in laboratory and actual performance of

vehicles, and different standards were used in

different areas for measuring energy efficiency, the

data obtained could not be compared directly.

Moreover, vehicle dealers have been providing fuel

consumption data of light duty vehicles, including

private cars, upon potential buyer’s request.

Post Meeting Note: The Secretariat had prepared the

assessment on the practicability for implementation of

the proposed measure H1 after the 8th meeting, which

was sent to the Subgroup members by email for

comments and confirmation on 28 July 2017.

Member’s comments and conclusion are as follow:


As the assessment said vehicle dealers did provide

2. Implementation

timeframe

13


energy consumption information to the purchasers, a

member expressed that from strategic point of view, the

government could step up and consider requiring the

vehicle dealers to publish such information on a

designated website. The member believed that the

Consumer Council is one of the suitable platforms.

Furthermore, the member urged the Government to

consider conducting a study to look into the practices in

other countries (e.g. Australia and EU), either

mandatory or voluntary, which have published vehicle

fuel consumption and noise level information.

The Government acknowledged the comments from the

member. However, currently there are no

internationally agreed standards on vehicle fuel

efficiency and the discrepancies between the fuel

efficiency figures of vehicles from vehicle dealers,

which are measured in a controlled laboratory

environment, and the actual performance of the vehicles

running on roads may mislead the public. As the

above two issues are still unresolved, the publication of

such figures is not considered appropriate at the

moment.]

Conclusion


The Sub-group confirmed the assessment. The

Government had stipulated the statutory standards of

vehicle exhaust emissions and noise emission. All

new vehicle models are required to comply with the

relevant standards. Also, vehicle dealers have been

providing fuel consumption figures of light duty

vehicles (design weight not more than 3.5 tonnes)

including private cars to potential purchasers upon

request. Since there are discrepancies between the

fuel efficiency figures from the laboratory with the

actual figures, while different regions using different

standards measuring energy efficiency, data collected

cannot be compared directly. Currently, there are no

internationally agreed standards on vehicle fuel

efficiency. EMSD will continue to follow closely the

development on testing and standards of vehicle fuel

efficiency in other countries.

14

Measure H5 – Set up a continuous and effective priority road network

for public vehicles.

Key Considerations Members’ Comments 1. Technical

feasibility

Members hoped that the Government could

consider setting up a continuous priority

network for public transport vehicles by linking

up existing intermittent bus-only lanes, so that

public transport vehicles could run more

smoothly and hence reducing emissions.

Members understood that the Government

would encounter difficulties in implementing

the measure, but they still hoped that the

Government would consider setting up a

continuous priority network for public

transport.

Members agreed that public transport vehicles

should be given priority to the use of road, so

as to attract more people to use public

transport. The proposed dedicated lanes

should cover all public transport vehicles (for

example, light buses and taxis). However,

some members opposed to the proposal of

letting taxis to use the dedicated lanes. They

considered that the priority network should be

set up for public transport vehicles with higher

passenger capacity (e.g. franchised buses).

The Transport Department (TD) said that due

to limited road resources, the aim of setting up

bus-only lanes was to attract the public to use

buses with higher passenger capacity as their

main transport mode, so as to utilise the limited

road space effectively. Thus, a smooth traffic

flow on the bus-only lanes should be ensured to

cope with the passenger carrying capacity

during peak hours.

2. Traffic condition

3. Public and Members reflected that buses changing lanes

transport trade’s across the bus-only lanes had caused traffic

reaction congestion.

Members reflected that the bus-only lanes in

some areas were too long that other road users

would need to use other driving lanes which

led to traffic congestion.

15

Key Considerations Members’ Comments 4. Implementation

timeframe

Members confirmed the evaluation.

Post Meeting Note: The Secretariat had prepared

the assessment on the practicability for

implementation of the proposed measure H5 after

the 8th

meeting, which was sent to the Subgroup

members by email for comments and confirmation

on 28 July 2018. Member’s comments and conclusion are found below:


Some members pointed out that the conclusion on

assessment is not supported by evidences and the

adverse comments are not based on sound

scientific figures. The public transport dedicated

road network is being practiced in many overseas

cities including London and they yield substantial

benefit in terms of operational efficiency and fuel

and emission savings. Members suggested the

government to make reference to other leading

cities and to review the efficiency of the existing

bus-only lanes for making further improvement.

The Government acknowledged the comments

from members. Some members at the Sub-group

meeting opposed the idea of setting up public

transport dedicated road network. TD will keep

in view the need and feasibility of expanding the

bus priority measures as appropriate.

Conclusion:


The Sub-group confirmed the assessment. Given

the role of franchised buses as road-based mass

carriers, TD had already set up 25 kilometres of

bus-only lanes and 14 designated bus gates as at

March 2017. Initial proposals for designating

new bus-only lanes at various locations have also

been put forward in the report of the Public

Transport Strategy Study. TD will keep in view

the need and feasibility of expanding the bus

priority measures as appropriate.

The setting up of a priority road network for public

16

Key Considerations Members’ Comments vehicles may have huge adverse effect on the

effectiveness of the entire road network. Not only

that this measure may worsen traffic congestion,

the congestion may also extend beyond the starting

point of the priority road network, preventing

public transport vehicles from entering the priority

road network, and thus reducing the effectiveness

of the measure.

Moreover, the possible measure may affect the

current loading/unloading and picking up/setting

down activities, causing inconvenience to other

road users. In fact, some public vehicles may

even change lanes due to the blockage by buses

ahead which are picking up or setting off

passengers in the priority network. Therefore, the

feasibility of this possible measure is in doubt and

would cause significant impact on other road users.

This possible measure requires further detailed

study.

17

Measure H6 - Review the policy on replacement of franchised buses.


1. Operational and

financial

feasibility of

franchised bus

services

Members suggested shortening the 18-year age

limit for franchised buses to the same level as that

for non-franchised buses and diesel commercial

vehicles (i.e. 15 years). Some members

expressed that franchised buses should not be

compared to other commercial vehicles as the

Government is strictly regulating the franchised

bus companies as well as their maintenance

requirements.

The Transport Department responded that various

arrangements have been made to improve

emissions from franchised buses. Such

arrangements include compulsory replacement of

retired franchised buses with the latest models of

environmentally-friendly vehicles, and retrofitting

existing Euro II and III buses with selective

catalytic reduction devices.

Post Meeting Note: The Secretariat had prepared the

assessment on the practicability for implementation of

the proposed measure after the meeting, which was

sent to the Subgroup members by email for comments

and confirmation.


No comments.

Conclusion:


The Subgroup confirmed the assessment results.

Franchised bus companies had pledged to deploy buses

under the age of 18 in providing franchised bus

services under normal circumstances. All Euro I

buses have already retired from services, while EPD

has been working with the franchised bus companies to

retrofit Euro II and Euro III buses with selective

catalytic reduction devices to reduce roadside

emissions from these buses. On the other hand,

further tightening the age limit of the franchised buses

might not be practicable as there could be substantial

2. Trades reaction

3. Public reaction

4. Operational cost

effectiveness

5. Implementation

timeframe

18


implications on the efficient operation of franchised

bus services. The higher cost arising from more

frequent replacement of vehicles would create pressure

for fare increase which might eventually affect the

basic fare level. In addition, it is not

environmentally-friendly to replace franchised buses

well before the end of their design life.

19

Digest of 8th Road transportation sub-group meeting...franchised bus companies to use electric buses...

Documents

Transcript of Digest of 8th Road transportation sub-group meeting...franchised bus companies to use electric buses...